Albert F. Maurer Co. v. United States
United States Customs Court
1Opinion of the Court
Donlon, Judge:
Men’s overshoes, or low cut rubbers made of natural rubber, product of Brazil and imported at Philadelphia, were appraised on the basis of American selling price, pursuant to a Presidential proclamation promulgated February 1, 1933 (T.D. 46158), under authority of the so-called “flexible” provision, section 336, of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. § 1336).
Plaintiff challenges the appraisement on two principal grounds: First, that the Presidential proclamation (T.D. 46158) is unconstitutional in its application to rubber footwear, manufactured in Brazil, because the…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- J. W. Hampton, Jr., & Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1928
- United States v. WurzbachSupreme Court of the United States · 1930
- United States v. ShireySupreme Court of the United States · 1959
- United States v. WhitridgeSupreme Court of the United States · 1905
- United States v. JohnsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1911
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- A. Zerkowitz & Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1965
- Albert F. Maurer Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1963
- E. Dillingham, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1971
- Weiner v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1963
- Academy Broadway Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 1985
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.